About Me

When not nosing, tasting, drinking and reading about malt whisky, I own one of Israel's premiere boutique coaching practices, specializing in small businesses and executive teams.
Trained in the law, I was an international law attorney and took part in Israel's peace negotiations with the Palestinians, as well as representing my country at the UN for parts of the negotiations on the implementation of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Later I was appointed to the military bench.
My favorite thing, other than whisky, is teaching.
You can contact me through the social media buttons above or by email: michael(at)maltandoak.com, replacing the (at) with an @.

Statement of Integrity and Guidelines

Malt and Oak is an independent whisky blog, offering my own views, opinions and news from the world of malt whisky.
These are my guidelines:

1. All whisky reviews published are of whiskies I have personally tasted and noted. Guest bloggers only write about their own personal tastings.

2. With the exception of official whisky samples, I accept no consideration whatsoever from any distillery, bottler, distributor, drink company or store for my opinions.

3. I maintain strict impartiality and objectivity in tasting all whiskies, not least when tasting official samples. Any review of official whisky samples sent to me will be so noted in the post.

4. I will accept invitations to tastings, events and official visits, and full disclosure will be made on any tasting notes and articles resulting from these events or visits.

5. Any sample received over 30 ml in volume is shared with fellow whisky bloggers. In any event, no sample larger than 100 ml will be accepted.

6. No advertisements promoting specific brands will be accepted.

7. I will answer any inquiry by my readers as quickly and as fully as possible.

8. Should I give a link purchase the reviewed whisky, it will be given free of any commercial interest. The link given will always point to cheapest selling price I found on the web. No commission is paid, nor any other consideration given, for such link.

9. As of July 2017, I serve as Douglas Laing’s Israel brand ambassasdor. As such, I will obviously not be posting reviews of Douglas Laing products.

Craigellachie 23 – Good Whisky, but What’s Up with the Pricing?

Before I get to the whisky itself, which is really good, although I liked the 17 better, I have to say something about pricing. Back in August, when the range was announced, I thought these new expressions, in the “Last Great Malts” series bringing the Dewar’s distilleries single malts to market were the biggest news of the year.

By the way, the PR guys did a great job with this short film:

Then the pricing for the Craigellachie range was announced. The 13 and 17 were priced relatively high in their price brackets, £40 and £80, respectively, but not prohibitively so. As I mentioned in their respective reviews (you can find the 13 here and the 17 here), the merit of the whisky can be debated vis-à-vis the value it offers. My own conclusions were that the 13 did not offer a good value, but the 17 did. The price of the 23 just took everybody’s breath away. £330!! After everybody’s eyes stopped watering, our reaction was that this must be some mistake. The fabulous Glengoyne 25 which I reviewed last week, is only £232, and even there you’ll hear people grumbling about VFM. It has to be a mistake.

Only it wasn’t. UK stores actually charge £330 for this expression. We all filed it under the “crazy but true stories of whisky” and thought no bottle will ever sell. Then the bottles started to surface in continental stores (in Germany and the Netherlands) at a very reasonable €160. Inquiries were made, bottles were bought (including a couple that made their way to Israel) and some sense had to be made in this chaos.

My friend and colleague Yoav, proprietor of the Whisky Gospel blog, made extensive inquires with Bacradi executives, drink distributors and stores and came up with one conclusion: The European bottles were a parallel import, not official Bacardi distribution, and Bacardi has every intention of keeping the official pricing high. As Stephen Marshal, Bacardi Global Marketing Manager for Whisky (you can see him in the video, BTW) told Yoav: “We’re not responsible for retailer pricing, it’s entirely up to them”. Come on, Stephen, If Bacardi sold it to stores for £100 a bottle, instead of £220-£250, consumers would pay £150, not £330. You can find Yoav’s full rant here.

The bottom line is this. It’s very good whisky, worth €160. It’s nowhere in the range of £330 (€420). Not even close!

Let’s take a look at the whisky itself:

Craigellachie 23 Year Old (46% ABV, NCF, NC)

Appearance: Deep gold, thin legs with a ring of droplets.

Nose: Honey and open fields, freshly cut leaves, star licorice, coconut jelly beans, wood, Black Tabac aftershave lotion, pound cake. After some time you get those sour notes so prevalent in the series.

Linger: The signature sour notes come through in the finish with some honey sweetness on the tongue. The linger isn’t overly long.

Conclusion

Well crafted, interesting and fresh, this expression definitely merits a return.

I did like the 17 better, as it’s as rich in aromas and flavors and has a better finish (and has a good VFM), but the 23 is really good whisky. Whisky that was priced so far out of its class, that made it completely irrelevant as anything other than a curiosity, which is a shame, because it’s really, really drinkable.

I can also tell you that this pricing fiasco has taken all the fun out of waiting for The Deveron, Aultmore and Royal Brackla, due out in 2015. One can only hope that in setting the prices for the rest of “Last Great Malts” Einstein’s words about sanity and madness will be observed. In his words, insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Hi Rod, thanks for your question.
Only the Craigellachie.
The Aultmore expressions just came out and I didn’t get my hands on a sample yet. The Deveron (Macduff distillery) and Royal Brackla will be appearing later in 2015.
I”m looking forward reviewing the other expressions as well 🙂

Not in the least, Jon.
I fully stand behind every word I wrote. In my blog, I offer my own opinion. I actually form it myself by tasting the whisky firsthand and evaluating what I consider to be good value vis a vis the price. My independent opinion is NEVER swayed by prizes, honorable mentions, self proclaimed bibles, high numeric scores or anybody’s opinion but my own. If the whisky is outrageously priced in my opinion, I’ll call the producer out, even if the liquid is good. If the whisky sucks, you’ll hear it too.
If you read the review, you’ll note that I thought the whisky itself is good, and on its own, can merit a prize in a show. When you factor in the price, Bacardi went way over the top, and got called out on it.
My blog is out there to offer my own, honest and unbiased opinion. If I don’t like a whisky or its pricing, a thousand other opinions won’t make me wince.
In this case, however, the award simply echoed my opinion. If you read the review, my opinion was “The bottom line is this. It’s very good whisky”. So basically, you took exception to the rest of my evaluation stating that the 23 is “…worth €160. It’s nowhere in the range of £330 (€420). Not even close!”. That’s fine, you’re entitled to your opinion, and you can pay £330 for a 23 year old. But me “wincing” over a panel of judges’ opinion on an expression? Not even close….
By the way, I think that’s why my readers come back to my blog: It’s honest. I’ll never “wince” over a review over a prize or a “whisky of the year” award, no matter who awarded it. They come to back to hear what my thoughts were and to get some information about the whisky. Nothing more, nothing less….